Profile picture for user Tyler Durden
by Tyler Durden
Sat, 04/14/2018 - 16:33
14.6K
SHARES
TwitterFacebookRedditEmailPrint
Somebody has some explaining to do... or did the Syrian airstrikes just 'distract' the citizenry from the reality surrounding the Skripal poisoning.

Remember how we were told my the politicians (not the scientists) that a deadly Novichok nerve agent - produced by Russia - was used in the attempted assassination of the Skripals? Remember the 50 questions (here and here) we had surrounding the 'facts' as Theresa May had laid them out? Ever wonder why, given how utterly deadly we were told this chemical was, the Skripals wondered around for a few hours after being 'infected' and then days later, survived with no chronic damage?

Well those doubts may well have just been answered as according to the independent Swiss state Spiez lab, the substance used on Sergei Skripal was an agent called BZ, which was never produced in Russia, but was in service in the US, UK, and other NATO states.

RT reports that Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, citing the results of the examination conducted by a Swiss chemical lab that worked with the samples that London handed over to the Organisation for the Prohibition of the Chemical Weapons (OPCW), that Sergei Skripal, a former Russian double agent, and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with an incapacitating toxin known as 3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate or BZ.

The Swiss center sent the results to the OPCW.

However, the UN chemical watchdog limited itself only to confirming the formula of the substance used to poison the Skripals in its final report without mentioning anything about the other facts presented in the Swiss document, the Russian foreign minister added.

He went on to say that Moscow would ask the OPCW about its decision to not include any other information provided by the Swiss in its report.

On a side note, the Swiss lab is also an internationally recognized center of excellence in the field of the nuclear, biological, and chemical protection and is one of the five centers permanently authorized by the OPCW.

The Russian foreign minister said that London refused to answer dozens of “very specific” questions asked by Moscow about the Salisbury case, as well as to provide any substantial evidence that could shed light on the incident.

Instead, the UK accused Russia of failing to answer its own questions, he said, adding that, in fact, London did not ask any questions but wanted Moscow to admit that it was responsible for the delivery of the chemical agent to the UK.

But hey, who cares about any of that? Diplomats have been sent home, Putin has been anointed Hitler, and besides, what about those missiles in Syria?

12 March 2018
Nigel Gould-Davies and James Nixey outline the principles that should guide the UK’s actions following the attempted assassination.
Dr Nigel Gould-Davies
Associate Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Programme
James Nixey
2018-03-12-Sberbank.jpg
Sberbank offices in London. Photo: Getty Images.

If confirmed, the attack on double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter would be the second known Russian state-sponsored murder in the UK, following the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in 2006. Other suspicious cases are now being reopened.

What principles should guide an effective response?

Effective measures are more than symbolic. They impose costs that punish unacceptable actions and deter future ones. The UK’s response to Litvinenko’s death – expelling four diplomats, imposing visa restrictions for officials, and suspending security service liaison – was clearly not sufficient enough to deter the latest attack. Symbols matter, but only if they credibly convey intentions about the consequences of further action.

Measures should be costly in smart ways, targeted at those who bear responsibility for Russian policy or directly benefit from them. Where possible, they should limit disruption to relationships that support other UK goals, such as long-term engagement with ordinary Russians. An appropriately hard line towards the Russian state is emphatically not Russophobic.

Any significant measures will incur, as well as impose, costs. This is inevitable, since they will disrupt existing, mutually-beneficial arrangements. But special pleading should not trump the broader national interest. An effective response is never a free lunch.
What do these principles imply for possible responses to the attempted murder of the Skripals?

Diplomatic sanctions. Expelling known Russian intelligence operatives under diplomatic, or other, cover will reduce Russia’s ability to mount future operations of this kind. But a more general cut in Russian embassy staff, or expulsion of the ambassador, would be merely symbolic, serve no purpose and invite a tit-for-tat response.

World Cup boycott. This is merely symbolic, domestically unpopular and unlikely to be emulated by others. At most, it would be a temporary embarrassment for Russia with no lasting effects. A protocol response is appropriate: palace and senior ministers should not attend key World Cup events. But there is little gain, and no long-term cost, in not sending the England team.

Dealing with fake news outlets. In a report published a year before the Salisbury attack, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee noted that ‘the rise of fake news in the UK is a real concern…The UK regulator should continue to take action against examples of outright falsehoods in Russian state-sponsored broadcasting.’

The spread of fake news – especially from RT and Sputnik, and through social media – benefits no one in the UK and has no UK counterpart in Russia. While regulators punish specific infractions, robust action has been inhibited by the belief that the ‘best defence against disinformation is a robust, free, wide, and varied media landscape’. This admirable principle is no longer adequate in meeting the security challenge Russia poses.

Effective financial sanctions. Britain has long been the most important centre for Kremlin-connected oligarchs seeking to legitimate their wealth. This benefits key figures and networks that support, are complicit in or help implement Russian policy.

Western sanctions have not impaired Russia's enjoyment of UK financial and legal services. Last November, oligarch and close Putin confidant Oleg Deripaska listed shares of his company EN+ in London. Most of the capital raised was used to repay a loan to VTB, a Russian state bank subject to Western financial sanctions.

Britain should now apply current financial regulations robustly and effectively. These include newly-strengthened civil asset recovery powers, Unexplained Wealth Orders, money-laundering investigations and ‘know your customer’ rules in banking and property.
What additional steps should the UK take?

The UK government should widen its range of sanctioning powers. One obvious way is to pass a version of the Magnitsky Act. First adopted by the United States, this imposes asset freezes and travel bans on figures complicit in human rights abuses and large-scale corruption. Given the scale of Russian assets in the UK, this would be a potent symbolic and substantive measure.

Britain could also conduct an exercise similar to that mandated by Articles 241–242 of the US Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, passed overwhelmingly by the US Congress last year. These require the implications of sanctioning key Kremlin-connected figures, and of expanding financial sanctions on Russia, to be set out. Like the Magnitsky Act, it is deeply unwelcome to the Russian authorities and would signal Britain’s resolve to respond further if necessary.

The power of Russian cyber intelligence-gathering and cyber interference to disrupt Western systems have been evident for some time. The recent release of Russian malware to knock out Ukrainian systems affected UK organizations too. Britain should be ready to respond robustly if this recurs.

Britain must coordinate its response closely with NATO and the European Union – the latter in an effective post-Brexit framework. A continent-wide solidarity with no prospect of easing current sanctions, and every prospect of tightening them, is as important as any measure the UK adopts on its own. A future ‘deep and special relationship’ with the EU must, at a minimum, include a common response to a country that (if confirmed) has carried out what is now being treated as a terrorist attack on European soil.

Keys to an effective response

For too long Britain has sought to meet a skilful and growing Russian state threat while servicing the interests of its major beneficiaries. This contradiction is no longer strategically or ethically sustainable. A whole-of-government approach to Russian policy is long overdue, one that would coordinate the many strands of the Russia relationship in a clear and consistent framework.

Britain does not lack options. The key question is whether it has the political will to use them. An effective response should:

Focus on real and lasting effects, not ‘newsy’ symbols or one-off measures;
Combat the use of fake news and elite assets in the UK that sustain Russia’s system and undermine others;
Develop a properly joined-up Russia strategy that is more, not less, than the sum of its parts;
Prioritize a common post-Brexit Russia policy with the EU;
Respond effectively to interests, at home as well as abroad, that seek to maintain the status quo.
Russia will now watch the UK closely for clues to its resolve. A weak response will invite further threats to British security.

There can be little doubt that the Russian government is behind the attempted assassination of double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter.

While there were the typical official denials, the Russian state has ways of communicating its innocence to foreign governments. In this case, it has not done so.

-

There is another possibility.

Namely that the whole gas attack is being stage managed by the backroom boys at Tory Party HQ so as to be a media distraction away from Brexit ..at least until after the Easter recess.

-

The Government of Theresa May lost its overall majority in Parliament at the last General election.

Now that the DUP seem to be lining-up with the EU and against the Tory Government in Parliament, there is a risk of the Tory Government losing a vote in Parliament, and with the Party being split collapsing for all time.

-

Alternatively if Theresa May stands down quietly forthwith at the start of the Easter recess and a hard line Brexiteer like Jacob Rees-Mogg MP takes over the leadership, then he can get the support of Tory MPs for the survival of the Party - regardless.

He can rule out there needing to be a second referendum.

-

One must not forget how in 1962, when the Tory Party was being torn apart by Profumo scandal,it was only saved by the media being distracted of the Great Train Robbery.

It allowed Harold Macmillan to quit quietly and Alec Douglas Home takeover as the new Prime Minister..

-

This time also during the brief gap during the handover from Theresa May to Jacob , the assets of the WMD arms dealer John Bredenkamp can be quietly unfrozen.

He has many creditors within the Tory Party

Countries on his customer list are also hostile to Israel, Russia and China.

The UBS bullion bond copied below carries a reference number of June 2012.

ie when the cash value of the Gold to which John Bredenkamp holds title was the stated £89.7 million pounds sterling....[1]

-

Incidentally , North Korea tested an ex-USAF plutonium warhead on 9th Oct 2006 by making it fizzle.

The total number of type W69 warheads that went astray in the wake of a largely unreported and catastrophic event with a B52 bomber could have been a maximum number of eight.

John Bredenkamp's Rhodesian mob were able to come by many of them.

-

To begin to get onto that wavelength you could watch the DVD ......The Sum of All Fears.

The agent used on the Skripals was not Novichok but was BZ which is incapacitating but you recover in a day or 2. BZ is in the arsenal of the UK and US Armies but not Russia. The very pure Novichok was added later so that it was in the mix that went to the OPCW. This was reported by the Swiss Spietz lab but was not reported by OPCW. The lab was concerned that there was a lot of A234 Novichok in the sample when the stuff is volatile and could not have survived the time between the Skripal poisoning and the lab measurements. Furthermore, at the concentration and purity found contact would have been fatal, but the Skripals did not die. This was thus clearly a black operation presumably by the CIA/MI6. There was no poison gas attack in Damascus. Robert Fisk visited there and interviewed the locals including doctors and nurses at the alleged gas attack site. I trust Robert Fisk, I have worked with him in the past. He reported my stuff from Iraq and I also worked with him identifying DU in the Balkans war.

The UK government are definitely conducting a cover up of the actual events around the alleged poisonings of Sergei and Yulia Skripal.

I say “alleged” because there is no actual hard evidence, that we would expect to see, if the Skripal’s had actually been poisoned.

There are no pictures on the net of the Skripals collapsed on the park bench. We would expect members of the public to take pictures of such an unusual scene. Salisbury is an affluent mostly middle class town and its Town Centre is definitely not a “Drugs Ghetto” where you see people collapsed in the street all the time.

There are not even any to camera interviews of any members of the public, who the government claim cared for the Skripal’s for 15 or 20 minutes before the Paramedics and Ambulance arrived.

There is only one written report in the State Propaganda Organ Fake News BBC of an alleged anonymous doctor, who allegedly claimed to have treated Yulia Skripal and put her in the recovery position at the park bench. The evidentiary value of this BBC report is zero. The BBC lie for the government ALL of the time.

Nor are there any to camera interviews of other witnesses of the scene at and around the park bench where the Skripals are alleged to have collapsed (there would presumably have been at least dozens of such witnesses over 20 or more minutes in a busy Town Centre at 4pm on a pleasant Sunday afternoon).

Nor are there any pictures of the Skripals unconscious in the Intensive Care Unit at Salisbury Hospital. Nor any pictures of either of the Skripal’s when they regained consciousness.
The propaganda value of having such pictures published in the mass media, to whip up anti Russia hysteria would have been absolutely HUGE. So why didn’t the government do this?

Skeptics will try to explain this away with patient confidentially or something, but this is nonsense. If the government wanted pictures to be published, they would have told MI5 to go get them published.
If the Hospital Managers objected to pictures being taken, MI5 would have taken them covertly by masquerading as a cleaner or nurse or something.

Nor are there any pictures of Yulia Skripal leaving the hospital. Why not?

It seems that Yulia Skripal is currently being held hostage and incommunicado at an unknown location by the UK government. She has not been allowed to give an interview to the media.
The only alleged statement was issued by the Police and contains worthless platitudes that she doesn’t want to speak to anyone, with words that are plainly not in the language of a non-native English speaker. it reads like a statement from a Whitehall bureaucrat and NOT Russian citizen Yulia Skripal.
Neither has she ever been seen or spoken to by the staff of the Russian Embassy since the alleged poisoning took place.

Neither has she spoken to her boyfriend/fiancee or her cousin Viktoria in Russia (apart from a snatched 2 minute conversation with Viktoria using a borrowed phone in the hospital).

Huh????

If you had just had the most terrifying experience of your entire life, where someone had just tried to murder you with poison, and you had been in a coma for 2 weeks in Intensive Care and nearly died, wouldn’t you want to tell your closest friends and relations everything about what had just happened to you?

Personally I would have spent hours talking about it with everyone I knew, discussing what happened and speculating about who might have tried to murder me and my father.
How about you?

But it gets worse – the Fentanyl Cover Up.

New evidence has now come to light, that the doctors at Salisbury Hospital were treating the Skripals for Fentanyl poisoning for at least the first day.
Fentanyl is a powerful opioid, 10,000 times stronger than heroin.

This evidence was published on March 5th in the “Clinical Services Journal”.
I.E. the day after the Skripal’s were poisoned on March 4th.

This article was spread widely on twitter from late April 26th and on April 27th.
The above article was doctored sometime after 2pm on 27th April, to remove any reference to Fentanyl.
Who doctored the article?
Why was this done?
If the article was wrong when it was published on March 5th why wasn’t it corrected sooner?
Why was the article suddenly changed 7 weeks after the event, just when it was getting some traction on Twitter?

I took a screen shot of the article and tweeted it out around 2pm Friday 27th.
The reference to poisoning by Fentanyl was still contained in the article at this time.
twitter.com/Ian56789/status/989854625443581953

UK First Responders & Emergency Room Staff at Salisbury Hospital naturally assumed #Skripal‘s had been poisoned by Opioids, as this was the most obvious fit for their symptoms.

So how did the Skripal’s survive a deadly attack by “Military Grade” Novichok nerve agent?

Here is an archived version of the article, with the references to Fentanyl, taken on 26th April at 10pm.
archive.is/Hp1cb

It would also explain why none of the members of the public who cared for the Skripals on the park bench and none of the Paramedics in the ambulance crew got sick.

Traces of Novichok could have been added to the blood samples taken from the Skripals and given to Porton Down for testing.
There are other possibilities, such as the Skripals first being poisoned with Fentanyl at the Park Bench and then being poisoned with a very tiny, less than lethal, dose of Novichok at the hospital sometime after the Skripals were admitted.

The above doesn’t explain what happened to Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey who the UK government also alleged was poisoned by Novichok.
Again no public statement or on camera interview with Nick Bailey has been published in the media.
The Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police issued a meaningless statement of Nick thanking the carers at Salisbury Hospital and saying he didn’t want to speak to anyone from the Press.
This statement was very obviously drafted by someone in MI5/Whitehall.

Fentanyl poisoning WOULD explain NHS Consultant for Emergency Care at Salisbury Hospital, Steven Davies, who said in a letter to the Times, that NO patients were treated for “nerve agent poisoning” at Salisbury Hospital.
Three people were treated for being poisoned by something else – these three people are presumably Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey.
N.B. Stephen Davies is a bona fide NHS Consultant at Salisbury Hospital – the Times interviewed him the day after his letter was published.

Above meme courtesy of John Delacour @JohnDelacour

Possible use of BZ Toxin in the Skripal Poisoning
This possibility needs further clarification. It is an evolving story.

It comes from a leaked report by the Swiss Lab, who were asked to test the Skripal blood samples by the OPCW.
The leaked report was given to Sergei Lavrov – Russian Foreign Minister, who then reported it to the media. Sergei Lavrov is noted for being very careful with his words and actions. I have yet to see him tell a lie so he is a very credible witness.

Lavrov is the EXACT OPPOSITE to Boris Johnson who is extremely ignorant about world affairs, constantly lies and recklessly shouts his mouth off all the time, making wild accusations without the slightest shred of evidence.

The report given to Lavrov has not been made public and remains “confidential”.

The OPCW have refused to publish the full contents of the report from the Swiss Lab and their carefully selected extract didn’t mention BZ toxin, nor did it make any reference to “Novichok” or “Russians” – hmmmm!

The OPCW have refused to publish the formula of the chemical compound the Swiss Lab identified as the poison. The chemical formula remains a secret. Why?
The chemical formulas of Novichok Nerve agents were published in a book 10 years ago, which is available on Amazon for about $20 – hmmmm again!

Hoax
The possibility remains that the whole Skripal poisoning was a hoax and nobody was actually poisoned.
Sergei Skripal might have been paid to stage the whole thing and then offered a portion of the money to his daughter.

Conclusions

We don’t know what happened in the Skripal poisonings (or at least I don’t) yet.
Was it a hoax?
If it was a real poisoning, what poisoned them, when was the poison administered, and exactly who administered the poison?
Nobody has identified any person or persons as the actual poisoner. No descriptions of any suspects has been issued by the Police and its been over 7 weeks since the alleged poisoning took place.

IWB: Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

We know the UK government are massively lying about the Skripal poisonings and they have been massively lying about it since the very beginning.

There have been frequent changes to the official government narrative (the poison was in Yulia’s luggage, it was in Skripal’s BMW, in Skripal’s house, in a Buckwheat cereal packet, on his front door handle, and now the government claim the poison was administered in “a liquid form”.
Hmmm – makes your head spin, doesn’t it?

If they were poisoned at Skripal’s house with “Military Grade” Novichok nerve agent “the most deadly nerve agent known to man”, how the hell did they wander around Salisbury for 3 to 7 hours without feeling any ill effects, until both of them collapsed at exactly the same time at 4pm at the Park Bench?
Anyone who believes this ridiculous story needs to go take some classes in Critical Thinking.

The only reason to lie is that you have something to hide or are pushing an agenda not based on the facts.
The government lie because they think they can get away with it, because of the help they know they will receive from their sycophantic accomplices in the Mainstream Media.
We don’t have a “Free Press” we have a Goebbels “Ministry of Propaganda” or Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth”.

With the Skripal case they may have gone a step too far. The lies are so obvious it has woken up a lot more people who didn’t previously realize that the government and the media constantly lie to them about more or less everything, more or less all the time.
Often the government’s and media’s narrative is the EXACT OPPOSITE of the Truth.

And these lies are absolutely massive. They have already murdered 2 million people in the Middle East and now the Neocons want to heat up the Conflict with Russia, which could kill us all.

Suspects and Motives
Theresa May, the UK government and MI5/MI6 remain the primary suspects for this False Flag attack (real attack or hoax).
Theresa May had by far the greatest motive to carry out such an attack.
If the UK government were not the initiators of the attack they are covering up who was actually responsible, which makes them just as guilty.

Second favorite suspect is the CIA,
There’s a few others

Debunking all the UK government’s official claims on the Skripal poisonings and a summary of suspects and motives.
Read both the comment and the full article.

Common sense, logic, the non-existent evidence supporting the government narrative, the numerous holes in the official story and the deliberate deception and lies perpetrated by the UK all point to Theresa May and MI5/MI6.
It is a very similar scenario to Tony Blair’s “sexed up” dossier on Saddam’s non existent WMDs to invade Iraq in 2003.

Both are an intelligence “scam” involving “chemical weapons” and pushed without question by the government’s propaganda sock puppets at the BBC and Corporate Media.

Motives for False Flag:-

Reverse Theresa May’s disastrous slide in the polls.

Ratchet up anti-Russia hysteria for the profits of the Military Industrial Complex – which has been the Neocon agenda for some years.

Create (or escalate) a Foreign enemy to deflect from disastrous policies at home (this one is as old as the hills).

An attempt to prevent BrExit.

Deflect from Theresa May’s disastrous Brexit negotiation shambles.

Divide the opposition Labour Party and get the Blairites attacking the Corbyn supporters. The BBC let slip that “senior government Ministers” thought this part of the plan was going better than expected.

Deflect from the massive Telford child sex abuse scandal that has been going on for decades without any action from the police.The Telford scandal which rivals Rotherham in scale and longevity has received very little Press coverage in the UK.

Possible cover up of MI6 involvement in the production of the fake and fabricated “Trump Dossier”. Skripal has links to Christopher Steele through his MI6 handler Pablo Miller. Pablo Miller works for Steele and lives in Salisbury.

NOBODY had more to gain from the Skripal poisonings than Theresa May and the current UK government.

While Russia had nothing to gain by killing a washed out spy they had exchanged in 2010 and lots to lose from said anti Russia hysteria. The Russians wouldn’t do anything that risked a Western boycott of this summer’s World Cup.

If the Russians wanted him dead they could have killed him 10 years ago while he was in jail, or waited until after the World Cup (but they don’t have a motive).

The timing of the attack is absolutely PERFECT for Theresa May with local UK elections coming up in May.

It doesn’t have to have been MI6. It could have been one of the UK’s Neocon allies such as the CIA with Theresa May conducting a cover up for the perpetrators.

The fraud being perpetrated by the UK government on the Skripal poisonings is VERY similarly to the fraud perpetrated by Tony Blair to go to War in Iraq in 2003.

If the UK had any evidence whatsoever of any Russian involvement in the Skripal poisoning they would have released at least something credible in a statement. But there’s been absolutely nothing except for blatant lies and innuendo. Why would the UK government feel the need to so obviously lie about how easy it is to make Novichok if they had some actual evidence as to who was responsible? It makes no sense.

The UK’s Ambassador to Moscow 6 page official presentation contained ZERO evidence of any Russian involvement. He flat out lied when he said the poison had to be made by Russia – Novichok can be made by anyone with a chemical weapons lab so that’s a couple of dozen countries at least.

It would be a dangerous undertaking but a private criminal gang could make a small quantity, enough for an assassination, in something like a drugs lab or they could have obtained a small quantity by illegal means by smuggling it from some lawless country – e.g. Ukraine.

The Primary suspects for the Skripal poisonings remain, in rough order of likelihood and how much they had to gain:-

Theresa May & MI5/MI6

CIA

Ukraine, Israel

Christopher Steele’s cronies in MI6 (rogue agents)

Hillary Clinton cronies in MI5 or MI6 (rogue agents)

A Russian criminal gang or Russian Oligarch who is anti Putin. (It would be very risky for them to do this as the chances are high that Russian intelligence would find out and retribution would be swift.)

Any of another dozen countries or rogue intel operatives who wanted to cause trouble for Russia and knew the warmongering UK government would cover up any evidence of their guilt.

Russia had lots to lose and nothing to gain by poisoning Skripal, especially just before the World Cup which they are still hoping will raise their international standing in the eyes of the world. They definitely wouldn’t want to risk a boycott by Western teams. There is a near negligible chance that the Russian government had anything to do with it. Also the UK government and MI5/MI6 do not suspect Russian government involvement, otherwise they would not have expelled people from the Russian Embassy who might have known something about it._________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS
https://www.rusemb.org.uk/fnapr/6515
02.05.2018
Embassy press officer replies to a media question regarding new statements by National Security Adviser Sir Mark Sedwill on the Skripals poisoning
Q: How can you comment on the remarks by Sir Mark Sedwill at the House of Commons Defence Committee on 1 May, when he called the British reaction to the Salisbury incident an example of the new “fusion doctrine” in action?
A: We have noted two main elements in Sir Mark’s statements. First, he admitted that no suspects have been identitified to date in the Skripals investigation. Yet Russia was accused of this crime almost immediately. Second, the UK has no evidence of Russia being involved into the poisoning, or having developed chemical poisons in violation of its international obligations (and no such evidence can possibly exist; it is worth reminding that Russia has clearly stated in a diplomatic note that it has nothing to do with the poisoning).
Mr Sedwill again portrays his letter to NATO Secretary General as a manifestation of unprecedented transparency. In reality, the letter contains nothing but publicly known facts and, on the other hand, unverifiable assertions with reference to secret services.
In other words, Sir Mark has again confirmed that the most serious accusations put forward against Russia as well as the ensuing far-reaching foreign policy decisions accompanied by mobilisation of the whole Western bloc, were based on pure assumptions.
If this is what the “fusion doctrine” is about, then we are convinced that this doctrine runs contrary to the genuine interests of the British people. Instead of strengthening national security, it bears the riks of hasty and ill-conceived decisions damaging the quality of UK’s relations with its international partners and undermining the country’s credibility. This is also true about the essence of the response to “Russia’s behaviour” that London has chosen, namely to expel diplomats (and to inevitably face reciprocal expulsions of British personnel), the very people whose job is to improve relations. Brexit requires exactly the opposite strategies.
Meanwhile, Sir Mark’s attempts to provide a doctrinal basis for the inappropriate moves by the Government cannot negate the fact that Russia, in violation of consular conventions, has been denied access to its nationals, Sergei and Yulia Skripal. We have no information on their whereabouts and cannot verify the British statements regarding the health and wishes. Equally, there is no information available on the course of the investigation, while the numerous media leaks turn out to be false, time and again. The situation regarding the murder of another Russian citizen, Nikolay Glushkov, is hardly any better.
We reiterate our demand to the British Government to ensure compliance with their international legal obligations and the universal rules of international relations, and to urgently provide the Russian side and the public with meaningful proof that Sergei and Yulia Skripal are not forcibly isolated. For our part, we reiterate our readiness, expressed more than once, to cooperate with Britain in investigating the Salisbury incident within the framework of existing international mechanisms. We expect London to show the same attitude with regard to the legal assistance requests sent by Russian Prosecutor General’s Office in the framework of the criminal case opened in Russia with respect to the attempt on life of our citizens._________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

Spin Watch co-founder: D-Notices are an attack on the very idea of a “free media”
THE public interest investigations group SpinWatch has published two private and confidential ‘D-notices’ sent to the press, both relating to the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in March.

‘D-notices’, officially known as DMSA-Notices, are notes from the UK Government to the British media advising them not to publish on a specific issue. They have no legal power to compel the press to do so, but they are strongly expected to be adhered to.

SpinWatch co-founder David Miller stated that they received copies of the D-Notice’s from a reliable source, and he told CommonSpace that they wanted to publish them because he believes the D-Notice system to be an attack on the very idea of “a free media”.

The first D-notice was issued on 7 March, three days after the Skripals poisoning.

“The issue surrounding the identify of a former MI6 informer, Sergei Skripal, is already widely available in the public domain. However, the identifies of intelligence agency personnel associated with Sergei Skripal are not yet widely available in the public domain. The provisions of DSMA Notice 05 therefore apply to these identities,” The D-Notice, signed off by secretary captain John Alexander, stated. “If any editor is currently considering publication of such material, may I ask you to seek my advice before doing so?”

DSMA is the initials of the official name for the Defence and Security Media Advisory Committee, the rebranded ‘D-Notice’ Committee made up of 15 senior media editors across television and newspapers, senior people in government and MoD representatives connected to the intelligence services.

READ MORE: Exclusive: Scientist – Defence Laboratory Chief Executive wrong to say Salisbury Novichok nerve agent could “probably” only be made by a state actor
The first D-notice came within hours of an article in The Daily Telegraph linking Sergei Skripal to a security consultant who, The Telegraph claim, compiled a dossier on Trump’s links to Russia.

The Telegraph piece began: “A security consultant who has worked for the company that compiled the controversial dossier on Donald Trump was close to the Russian double agent poisoned last weekend, it has been claimed.

“The consultant, who The Telegraph is declining to identify, lived close to Col Skripal and is understood to have known him for some time.”

The second D-notice issued one week later [14 March] was a reiteration of the first, calling once again on all press to avoid: “inadvertent disclosure of Sensitive Personnel Information (SPI) that reveals the identity, location or contact details of personnel (and their family members) who have security, intelligence and/or counter-terrorist backgrounds, including members of the UK Security and Intelligence Agencies, MOD and Specials Forces.”

It was not publicly known that D-notices had been issued on the Skripal case until Miller, co-founder of SpinWatch and professor at the University of Bath, published them on Tuesday [8 May], and he told CommonSpace that he felt it was important to publish them as the D-notices undermine freedom of the press.

“[I wanted to publish them] because the government says you’re not supposed to. The D-notices are supposed to be voluntary, but all the media play along with them so they’re not really – and that’s not the sort of thing any sort of free press should be doing.”

On the Skripal case specifically, Miller said “the UK state are trying to manage this story”.

“There is clearly something they are trying to hide. We don’t know what that is yet, but the more that is in the public domain the more likely we are to find out,” he said.

READ MORE: Analysis: What do revelations about BBC political vetting tell us about press freedom in the UK?
According to the official history, D-Notices were first established in 1912 as a system for the Admiralty and War Office to prevent the press “from publishing information which might be of value to a future enemy”. The organisation was founded on the trust sought by press representatives that D-Notices would only be sent to Editors on issues which “really did affect the National interest would be concerned”.

The system was only made public in 1982.

While D-notices are voluntary, Moyra Grant, author of the book D-Notice, stated: “The guidelines also state pointedly that the D Notice system is a useful reminder of the legal sanctions which may be brought to bear if an editor or producer oversteps the mark. Moreover, pressure to comply can be overwhelming.”

SpinWatch is described on its website as an organisation which “investigates the way that the public relations (PR) industry and corporate and government propaganda distort public debate and undermine democracy.”

Spinwatch can reveal that the Skripal affair has resulted in the issuing of not one but two 'D-Notices' to the British media, which are marked private and confidential. We can also disclose the contents of both notices, which have been obtained from a reliable source.

That two notices were issued has been confirmed by the ‘D-Notice' Committee. The Committee, which is jointly staffed by government officials and mainstream media representatives has recently changed its name to the ‘Defence and Security Media Advisory (DSMA) Committee’. The use of the word ‘advisory’ is no doubt a bid to discourage the public from thinking that this is a censorship committee. However, the DSMA-Notices (as they are now officially called) are one of the miracles of British state censorship. They are a mechanism whereby the British state simply ‘advises’ the mainstream media what not to publish, in ‘notices’ with no legal force. The media then voluntarily comply.

Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned in Salisbury and discovered collapsed on a park bench in the late afternoon of Sunday 4 March. Less than three days later on 7 March, the first and - until now undisclosed - notice was issued.

The notice stated that the ‘issue surrounding the identify [sic] of a former MI6 informer Sergei Skripal is already widely available in the public domain. However, the identifies [sic] of intelligence agency personnel associated with Sergei Skripal are not yet widely available in the public domain’.

The notice goes on to refer to standing notice 5 on the intelligence services:

'inadvertent disclosure of Sensitive Personnel Information (SPI) that reveals the identity, location or contact details of personnel (and their family members) who have security, intelligence and/or counter-terrorist backgrounds, including members of the UK Security and Intelligence Agencies, MOD and Specials Forces.'

On the evening of 6 March a Russian opposition news outlet Meduza, styling itself 'Russia's free press in exile', published a long piece on Skripal in English. Citing a variety of online sources including in Russian, some from over a decade old, identifying Pablo Miller as the MI6 agent inside the Estonian embassy who had recruited Sergei Skripal. By the next afternoon the notice was issued to the mainstream media. Perhaps the misspellings in the DSMA notice -'identify' and 'identifies' instead, presumably, of 'identity' and 'identities' - was due to haste in getting it out?

This was followed that evening by a report in the Daily Telegraph published online at 10.24pm. The Telegraph was the first mainstream outlet to discuss - in discreet and decorous terminology - the connection between Skripal and a 'security consultant' who is 'understood to have known him for some time' and 'is also based in Salisbury'. It noted that the paper was 'declining to identify' the consultant, and we can only suspect that this was not unconnected to the notice issued earlier that day. The Telegraph reported that the ‘consultant’ worked at the same company (Orbis Business Intelligence) that compiled the controversial dossier on Donald Trump and Russia – paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Convention. The consultant was, as we now know, Pablo Miller, who had ‘known’ Skripal in the specific sense that he was his MI6 handler. Some, such as Guardian journalist Luke Harding, have suggested that Miller never worked for Orbis, but this seems to be false.

The second D-Notice was issued on 14 March. This appears to be the notice referred to in a tweet by Alex Thomson of Channel Four News. This notice reiterated the warning about intelligence service personnel.

One of the reactions from the Russian authorities in response to the measures that the UK authorities have recently announced, may include the publication or broadcast of Sensitive Personal Information (SPI).

Any publication or broadcast of SPI could identify personnel (and their family members) who work in sensitive positions.

The notice helps to encourage the climate of anti-Russian hysteria implying that investigative reporting on this matter that might discuss British intelligence is in effect Russian propaganda. This is a nice illustration of David Leigh’s phrase from nearly 40 years ago: ‘the obverse of the secrecy coin is always propaganda’.

It is a standing rebuke to the notion that journalism should question power, that 15 senior media people should agree to sit on this censorship committee. As well as the BBC, ITV, ITN and Murdoch’s Sky News, representing broadcasters, there are a variety of representatives from the broadsheet and tabloid press, regional and Scottish newspapers and magazines and publishing - including two News UK and Harper Collins, (both owned by Murdoch) as well as Trinity Mirror, the Daily Mail and the Guardian. On the government side of the committee are the chair from the MoD and four intelligence connected representatives from the MoD (Dominic Wilson, Director General Security Policy), Foreign Office (Lewis Neal, Director for National Security), Home Office (Graeme Biggar, unspecified post in the OSCT) and Cabinet Office (Paddy McGuinness, Deputy National Security Adviser for Security, Intelligence, and Resilience).

The DSMA committee likes to cultivate the impression that it is a rather uninteresting committee that is, as a former vice chair of the committee (a journalist) put it, ‘is emphatically not censorship… but voluntary, responsible media restraint'. Then working at Sky News, that vice chair, Simon Bucks, is now CEO at the Services Sound and Vision Corporation, the broadcasting service which says it is ‘championing the Armed Forces’. Bucks also wrote that the DSMA committee is ‘the most mythologised and misunderstood institution in British media... “Slapping a D-notice” on something the establishment wanted suppressed has been the stuff of thrillers, spy stories and conspiracy theories for more than a century'.

This is a typical deception used regularly by defenders of the British system of censorship. DSMA notices are indeed ‘slapped’ on the media to this day, as the two notices revealed here show.

The DSMA notices can be found here:

DSMA notice 7 March 2018
DSMA notice 14 March 2018

For further information on the DSMA Notice Committee see Powerbase: Defence and Security Media Advisory (DSMA) Notice System.

*This story was updated on 9 May to correct the time of publication of the Telegraph piece on 7 March and note the Russian coverage of the Skripal case the day before.

Quote:

SKRIPAL INCIDENT TOOK PLACE ON NEW CHIEF CONSTABLE KIER PRITCHARD'S FIRST DAY IN THE JOBhttp://www.wiltshire-pcc.gov.uk/Events-and-Engagement/News-Archive/201 8/Reflections-on-Salisbury-nerve-agent-attack.aspx
REFLECTIONS ON SALISBURY NERVE AGENT ATTACK
PRINT THIS PAGE
Amber Rudd group Three weeks ago, I was introducing the new Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police to the public in a live broadcast from our Devizes HQ.
It was Kier Pritchard’s first day in the job and we had agreed with BBC Wiltshire that it could present its morning show from the Crime and Communications Centre (CCC) to give listeners a flavour of some of the services provided by Wiltshire Police and my office.

We had just come out of three days of “The Beast from the East” and my expectation over the weekend was that the discussion on the radio would focus on the way police and partner agencies had dealt with the snow and how, in particular, our staff had been able to work from home or other locations using the laptops and smart phones in which I had invested.

As Kier and I came off air at 10am the room we had been using was quickly transformed into an incident room as the scale of the terrible events in Salisbury became clearer.

In the days and weeks that followed, our Force – among the smallest and lowest funded in the country - faced what was surely one of the biggest challenges in its long history.

I have made several visits to Salisbury since then.

There were formal occasions such as meeting the Prime Minister and Home Secretary and informal chats with

Officers, staff and volunteers on the ground, including colleagues from elsewhere who gave extensive support to Wiltshire.

Our Force had been seeking volunteers to ensure that officers guarding the various sites were provided with food and hot drinks on some bitterly cold days and nights. I can vouch for the weather conditions on the Saturday night “welfare run”.

There has been considerable local support for the officers from cafes, restaurants and other shops in the city.

I am full of admiration for the officers, staff and volunteers from Wiltshire and colleagues from the other forces who put their personal lives on hold while this extraordinary investigation continued. Praise must also go to everyone involved in the welfare effort.

Hundreds of specialist officers, including forensic experts and intelligence officers, have been deployed, working around the clock. This remains a major investigation led by the Counter Terrorism Policing Network, into an attempted murder by the administration of a nerve agent.

Devizes HQ became the centre for the national investigation team.

I was pleased that Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, the national lead for counter terrorism at Scotland Yard, sought me out in Salisbury to pay tribute to the Force.

He later sent me a copy of a letter he had written to the National Police Chiefs’ Council in which he said: “The scale of the police response to this incident has been vast and would stretch normal resource levels in many forces across the country.

“As a small force, Wiltshire Police has demonstrated to a global audience its ability to ‘stand up’ at a time of crisis. This is a testament to all the officers and staff employed by the Force.”

For Kier and our new Deputy Chief Constable Paul Mills, these past weeks have been a baptism of fire. They have performed admirably and I would like to fully endorse this comment by Assistant Commissioner Basu: “I have been impressed by their professionalism, commitment and leadership throughout this intensive period which is a credit to themselves and Wiltshire Police”.

A recovery programme for Salisbury is now getting underway, led by Wiltshire Council. I shall be among those attending a meeting of a Recovery Co-ordinating Group.

I fully support the “Salisbury is Open” campaign and the decision by Wiltshire Council to lift parking charges for the foreseeable future to attract shoppers and visitors to this beautiful city.

Amid the talk of recovery, we must not lose sight of the victims at the centre of this shocking attack: Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia. Sadly their condition in hospital is still described as critical.

Finally I would like to add my good wishes to DS Nick Bailey and his family as he continues to recover after being discharged from hospital.

Germany’s foreign intelligence service secured a sample of the Soviet-developed nerve agent Novichok in the 1990s and passed on its knowledge to partners including Britain and the US, according to German media reports.

Britain says an attack earlier this year on former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia was carried out using Novichok, and blames Russia.

German newspapers Sueddeutsche Zeitung and Die Zeit and broadcasters WDR and NDR said in a joint report on Thursday that the West’s knowledge of the substance stems largely from a sample obtained by Germany’s BND agency in the 1990s.

The report, which cited unidentified people involved in the operation, said the BND obtained the sample from a Russian scientist and Germany then had it analysed at a Swedish lab.

Sergei Skripal, the former Russian spy, who was poisoned with a nerve agent at his home in Salisbury, has been discharged from hospital, it has been announced.

The 66-year-old was released from Salisbury District Hospital almost ten weeks after he and his daughter, Yulia, 33, were targeted in a novichok attack at his home in Wiltshire.

Mr Skripal was admitted to hospital on March 4 after taking ill along with Julia, during a Sunday afternoon stroll in Salisbury.

Initially the pair were both in a critical condition and it was feared they would not recover.

But both made good progress and in April, Yulia, was discharged from hospital and was moved to a secure location to continue her recuperation.
Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned in March
Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned in March

At the time doctors said her father had also responded "exceptionally well" to treatment and was likely to make a full recovery.

Theresa May, the Prime Minister, has said it was "highly likely" that Russia was behind the attack, but the claim has been denied by Moscow.

A Scotland Yard spokesman said the investigation into poisoning continued. The spokesman said: "This is a complex investigation and detectives continue to gather and piece together all the evidence to establish the full facts and circumstances behind this dreadful attack."

Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, who was one of the first responders when the Skripals took ill, was also treated for the effects of the nerve agent, but he was discharged within days.
Sergei Skripal was jailed in Russia in 2006 but moved to the UK in 2010
Sergei Skripal was jailed in Russia in 2006 but moved to the UK in 2010 Credit: AFP

In a statement issued on Friday morning, Lorna Wilkinson, director of nursing at the hospital, said: "We have been able to discharge Sergei Skripal. This is an important stage in his recovery, which will now take place away from the hospital.

"Treating him and the other two people poisoned by this nerve agent, while still providing outstanding care to the other patients who rely on our hospital, has been a huge and unprecedented challenge that I'm proud our staff at Salisbury Hospital have risen to."
Large parts of Salisbury had to be sealed off during the investigation
Large parts of Salisbury had to be sealed off during the investigation Credit: AFP

Salisbury District Hospital chief executive, Cara Charles-Barks, said: "It is fantastic news that Sergei Skripal is well enough to leave Salisbury District Hospital. That he, Yulia and DS Bailey have been able to leave us so soon after coming into contact with this nerve agent is thanks to the hard work, skill and professionalism of our clinicians, who provide outstanding care to all our patients, day in and day out.

"This has been a difficult time for those caught up in this incident - the patients, our staff and the people of Salisbury. I want to thank the public for their support, and I want to pay a special tribute to both the clinical staff here at the trust and those who work so hard behind the scenes. They've demonstrated the very best of the NHS."

Did Skripal collaborate in his own attempted assassination attempt? - think about it.

A better way of putting it would be:
'Did Skripal collaborate in his own attempted assassination hoax?...'_________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

This new revision could revolutionise Chemical Warfare strategies._________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

Petition is up to 1,071; there was a nearly 17-hour gap between the last two signers.
Please keep pushing it on online ‘newspaper’ comments and blogs, Facebook and Twitter.
I know Change is a cr*p organisation, but it's worth pushing up the signatures. Show the government WE THE PEOPLE DON'T TRUST A WORD YOU SAY._________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

'...In other words, she reached conclusions before the establishing of facts, and it goes without saying that this is the very opposite of a rational approach. Indeed, as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle warned us through his most famous creation, Sherlock Holmes:

It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.

But what of her actual claims? The statement that Russia has a record of conducting state-sponsored assassinations is entirely irrelevant to establishing guilt in this case. Past behaviour can be useful evidence to support a case, but guilt must always be proved on the basis of the facts and evidence in the case at hand, and on them alone. Anything else is simply dangerous and wrong.

Which means that the Government’s case essentially relies on just two parts:

That Mr Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, along with Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey, were poisoned by the military grade nerve agent, A-234 (one of the so-called “Novichok” nerve agents).
That because this substance was developed in Russia (actually the Soviet Union), it therefore must have originated from that country.
However, both of these apparent facts are demonstrably untrue.

To take the second point first, it has now been proven beyond any doubt whatsoever that a number of other countries have either produced the substance, or know how to produce it. The Czech Government has admitted producing a small quantity of the closely related substance, A-230; Iran has produced Novichok, which it registered with the OPCW; The German Intelligence Agency, BND, was given the formula back in the 1990s, and they shared it with a number of other NATO countries, including the US and UK. The Edgewood Chemical and Biological Defense Command in Maryland, USA, recorded the formula back in 1998.

What is more, as the Moon of Alabama website points out, David Collum, Professor of Organic Chemistry at Cornell University has stated that any credible organic chemist could make Novichok nerve agents.

All of which means that the claim that the poison must have come from Russia is demonstrably untrue.

But if analysis of that second claim shows the British Government’s theory to be somewhat dodgy, scrutiny of the first shows it to be entirely false. Given the toxicity of A-234, being around 5-8 times more toxic than VX (some reports state it as being 10 times more toxic), had the Skripals come into contact with it on the door handle of Mr Skripal’s house, as is alleged, one of two things would have occurred:

a) They would either have died within a few minutes of coming into contact with it or

b) In the remote possibility that they had survived, they would have suffered for the rest of their short lives from irreparable damage to their central nervous system, with a number of chronic health issues, such as cirrhosis, toxic hepatitis, and epilepsy (see here for details of what I understand to be the only known survivor of poisoning by this substance, Andrei Zheleznyakov).

What they would not have done is spent the next four hours swanning around Salisbury, going for a drink and then for a meal in a restaurant. What they would not have done is to exhibit symptoms closer to having been poisoned by a hallucinogenic than a military grade nerve agent. And they most certainly would not have collapsed at exactly the same time as each other, four hours later, after showing no previous signs of illness in the restaurant.

Yet as it is, not only are the Skripals and D.S. Bailey still alive, but none have suffered irreparable damage to their nervous system. In fact, in her conversation with her cousin, Viktoria, on 5th April, Yulia Skripal specifically made mention that “everyone’s health is fine, there are no irreparable things“.

Given that this is so, it is entirely rational to come to the following conclusion:

The claim that Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal and D.S. Bailey were poisoned by A-234, which is one of the most deadly nerve agents known to man, and which either kills or leaves its victims with irreparable damage, is demonstrably untrue.....'

More to come:

'...Having dealt with the official story, I want in Part 2 to deal with what I believe to be some of the most interesting clues in this case, each of which is being ignored or swept under the carpet.'_________________'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.

I am a Salisbury resident, and I am concerned with some aspects of the investigation into the poisonings that occurred in March and June this year in Salisbury and Amesbury respectively.

Let me begin by quoting some words from your predecessor as Head of Counter Terrorism Policing, Mark Rowley, who made the following statement on 7th March, shortly before his retirement:
"We would like to hear from anybody who visited the area close to the Maltings shopping centre where these two people were taken ill on Sunday afternoon, and may have seen something that could assist the investigation. The two people taken ill were in Salisbury centre from around 1.30pm. Did you see anything out of the ordinary? It may be that at the time, nothing appeared out of place or untoward but with what you now know, you remember something that might be of significance. Your memory of that afternoon and your movements alone could help us with missing pieces of the investigation. The weather was poor that day so there were not as many people out and about. Every statement we can take is important."
Understandably, Mr Rowley was keen to receive as much information and as many details from local people as possible, in order to help the investigation. This is of course entirely natural for someone in overall charge of an investigation, and so I assume that you would echo his sentiments.

However, more than four months into the investigation into the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal, along with D.S. Nick Bailey, there are a couple of rather obvious things which investigators could have done, which would have facilitated the kind of information from the public called for by Mr Rowley, but which they have conspicuously failed to do.

The first is with regard to CCTV footage from the day. Since 4th March, the public has been shown almost no footage in connection with the case. We have seen footage of Mr Skripal in a newsagents, days before the poisoning, which it has to be said is of little use in terms of jogging memories of local people for details of what happened on 4th March. We have also been shown approximately two seconds of blurred footage of a nameless couple, one of whom was carrying a red bag, walking through Market Walk at 15:47 on 4th March. However, neither of these people are Mr Skripal or his daughter, although it has to be said that it has never been satisfactorily cleared up publicly whether these people are considered persons of interest in terms of the inquiry.

The lack of CCTV footage is very odd, since:
a) CCTV footage of Mr Skripal on 4th March certainly does exist (for example, I know for a fact that there is clear footage of Mr Skripal feeding ducks with some boys near the Avon Playground, at around 1:45 that day).
b) Releasing such footage is surely exactly the sort of thing that is likely to jog peoples' memories and lead to the kind of information requested by Mark Rowley.
The second point is with regard to Mr Skripal's and Yulia's movements on the morning of 4th March. Many early reports stated that investigators were trying to establish their movements, but one of the things that had hampered this was the fact that they both had their mobile telephones switched off.

I understand that at that time, these details might have been puzzling, and indeed I get the sense that investigators were keen to find out as much as possible about the movements of the pair, so that they could:
a) Put an end to the media speculation and
b) Relate these details to the general public, again in the hope that the information given out might lead to vital information coming in.
Forgive me for sounding somewhat facetious here: Mr Skripal and his daughter are both alive. In fact, both have been awake and well for around four months. It is not as if they died, taking with them the secret of their movements on the morning of 4th March to the grave.

And so what was once a mystery is surely a mystery no more. Isn't finding out what their movements were on that morning now the simplest thing in the world, requiring no more detective work than just asking Mr Skripal some straightforward questions, such as:
Where did he go that morning?
What was he wearing that day?
Why did he have his phone switched off?
Did he see anyone or anything suspicious near the house that day?
Why was he agitated in Zizzis?
Was it caused by ill health, or was there another reason?
What did he do after leaving Zizzis?
Does he recognise the identity of the couple seen on CCTV in Market Walk?
Did the red bag found at the bench belong to Yulia?
What are his last memories before collapsing at the bench?
If it is somewhat strange that no CCTV footage of Mr Skripal and Yulia from 4th March has been released, frankly it is nothing short of astonishing that details of their movements on the day have not been released. Surely Mr Skripal and Yulia would want this information to be released, in the hope that it might jog someone's memory, and so help catch the people who poisoned them? Surely as the head of this investigation, you would also want this information to be made public, in the hope that it might lead to new information?

I suspect that your response might run something along the lines of: we cannot release this information, as there is a counter-terrorism investigation going on. However, it is precisely because there is a counter-terrorism investigation going on that this vital information - which your team surely possesses - must be released.

If it is released, it can only do good, helping the investigation by jogging the memories of people who may have seen something important that day.

If it is not released, then I fear that it will only continue to arouse the suspicions of increasing numbers of people that the public are being grossly misled as to what really happened on that day.

And so as someone who loves my City, who desires to see the truth come to light, and who wants to see the perpetrators caught, I respectfully ask you and your team to release all the CCTV footage you have of Mr Skripal and his daughter from 4th March, and to allow Mr Skripal to publicly testify about what happened to him and Yulia on that day. These two simple acts would surely help you in your investigations, as well as allaying public fears that the truth is being withheld.

Best wishes,

Rob Slane_________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

A woman told the meeting that the Mercedes was seen 'four times in one week prior to the week it [the Skripals attack] happened'.

'Two teams of Russian hitmen were behind Salisbury Novichok...

She added: 'One time was in the Wilton Road garage. The car had Romanian number plates and there were four people in the car. There's CCTV. He paid by credit card.

'They were seen four times around Salisbury early morning, like 6.30 in the morning, also late at night between 11 and 12... you wonder whether they were doing some kind of reconnaissance.

'An Eastern European car, travelling with four people, at that time, on several occasions, close to where the Skripals live, is surely relevant.'

Dawn Sturgess (pictured) died after spraying a bottle of Novichok that was disguised as perfume

Charlie Rowley (pictured after his release from hospital) said the nerve agent took just 15 minutes to poison Ms Sturgess after she sprayed the 'oily' substance on to her wrists

Det Chief Supt Barnes said: 'When we catch the people responsible and get them into court and the evidence is being heard, that's when the full story will emerge. I do not want to jeopardise any opportunity of that end result.'

Police believe the Novichok nerve agent was smeared on the door handle of Mr Skripal's home over the weekend of March 3 and 4. Mr Skripal, 66, and Yulia, 33, are recovering at a secret location.

The meeting was held in Amesbury where Charlie Rowley, 45, and Dawn Sturgess, 44, were struck down last month after finding and opening a branded, sealed perfume bottle containing Novichok.

A very important point. If the two men were identified coming through Gatwick, it is impossible that the police do not know what kind of visa they were travelling on. Something is very wrong here - ties in with the fact that the photos released are not UK visa standard photos. https://t.co/OW1bWLUw9E

UK authorities haven’t established real identity (and hence nationality) of the #Skripal suspects. But despite not knowing even who they really are, UK govt (and most US UK media) now claim with certainty that they are Russian, and that they work for GRUhttps://t.co/nzmbCdo5cn

A key hole in the British government’s account of the Salisbury poisonings has been plugged – the lack of any actual suspects. And it has been plugged in a way that appears broadly convincing – these two men do appear to have traveled to Salisbury at the right time to have been involved.

But what has not been established is the men’s identity and that they are agents of the Russian state, or just what they did in Salisbury. If they are Russian agents, they are remarkably amateur assassins. Meanwhile the new evidence throws the previously reported timelines into confusion – and demolishes the theories put out by “experts” as to why the Novichok dose was not fatal.

This BBC report gives a very useful timeline summary of events.

At 09.15 on Sunday 4 March the Skripals’ car was seen on CCTV driving through three different locations in Salisbury. Both Skripals had switched off their mobile phones and they remained off for over four hours, which has baffled geo-location.

There is no CCTV footage that indicates the Skripals returning to their home. It has therefore always been assumed that they last touched the door handle around 9am.

But the Metropolitan Police state that Boshirov and Petrov did not arrive in Salisbury until 11.48 on the day of the poisoning. That means that they could not have applied a nerve agent to the Skripals’ doorknob before noon at the earliest. But there has never been any indication that the Skripals returned to their home after noon on Sunday 4 March. If they did so, they and/or their car somehow avoided all CCTV cameras. Remember they were caught by three CCTV cameras on leaving, and Borishov and Petrov were caught frequently on CCTV on arriving.

The Skripals were next seen on CCTV at 13.30, driving down Devizes road. After that their movements were clearly witnessed or recorded until their admission to hospital.

So even if the Skripals made an “invisible” trip home before being seen on Devizes Road, that means the very latest they could have touched the doorknob is 13.15. The longest possible gap between the novichok being placed on the doorknob and the Skripals touching it would have been one hour and 15 minutes. Do you recall all those “experts” leaping in to tell us that the “ten times deadlier than VX” nerve agent was not fatal because it had degraded overnight on the doorknob? Well that cannot be true. The time between application and contact was between a minute and (at most) just over an hour on this new timeline.

In general it is worth observing that the Skripals, and poor Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, all managed to achieve almost complete CCTV invisibility in their widespread movements around Salisbury at the key times, while in contrast “Petrov and Boshirov” managed to be frequently caught in high quality all the time during their brief visit.

This is especially remarkable in the case of the Skripals’ location around noon on 4 March. The government can only maintain that they returned home at this time, as they insist they got the nerve agent from the doorknob. But why was their car so frequently caught on CCTV leaving, but not at all returning? It appears very much more probable that they came into contact with the nerve agent somewhere else, while they were out.

“Boshirov and Petrov” plainly are of interest in this case. But only Theresa May stated they were Russian agents: the police did not, and stated that they expected those were not their real identities. We do not know who Boshirov and Petrov were. It appears very likely their appearance was to do with the Skripals on that day. But they may have been meeting them, outside the home. The evidence points to that, rather than doorknobs. Such a meeting might explain why the Skripals had turned off their mobile phones to attempt to avoid surveillance.

It is also telling the police have pressed no charges against them in the case of Dawn Sturgess, which would be manslaughter at least if the government version is true.

If “Boshirov and Petrov” are secret agents, their incompetence is astounding. They used public transport rather than a vehicle and left the clearest possible CCTV footprint. They failed in their assassination attempt. They left traces of novichok everywhere and could well have poisoned themselves, and left the “murder weapon” lying around to be found. Their timings in Salisbury were extremely tight – and British Sunday rail service dependent.

There are other possibilities of who “Boshirov and Petrov” really are, of which Ukrainian is the obvious one. One thing I discovered when British Ambassador to Uzbekistan was that there had been a large Ukrainian ethnic group of scientists working at the Soviet chemical weapon testing facility there at Nukus. There are many other possibilities.

John Laccohee-Joslin
2 hours ago
I am to say the least both feed up and more than anoyed at Gt.Britons stupidity over the farse.
For all the people who are unaware of the facts that the Government of Gt. Briton are truly very much aware of, but keep the lies going.
As an ex serviceman may I explain why this is a witch hunt of the sickest kind, which is also making a laughing stock of the country concerned.
Nerve gas for a start would not be used fron a perfume spray bottle for a very good reason, that being, who ever sprayed it would also get a dose themselves, more than enough to kill.
It was stated that in the begining these people were found sitting on a park bench, i.e. out in the open where if used as described would have effected a lot of people not just two people, plus of course the person delivering the blow.
Every serviceman has in his resperator a small package with an injection that one gives oneself if you feel the onset of being contaminated. You do not fuss about, you stick it in anywhere leg arm,anywhere to get tbe antidote I believe its name is Atropean ( the spelling may be incorrect)
What makes this so stupid is the fact that they really want the public as a whole, to believe that the ecery day medical services also carry this.
The fact that had it been as described those concerned would have been dead and secondly, it would be very doubtful if the medical services would know they were dealing with nerve gas, and most definitly would not have the antidote in their tool kit.
Secondly, if sprayed it would have effected a lot more people.
As said, only a total fool would even contemplate carrying this in a glass bottle, after all, you only need to break it once, so subjecting it to a ride on a plane, who these days are very strick as to what you can have, and this would have been spotted straight away.
There are enough holes in this farse being played out by an ignorant bunch of old " REDS UNDER THE BED BRIGADE" Despite the fact that Russia is not the big bad boogy man that they are trying so hard to hang on this country, holes big enough to drive a London double decker through, and to keep it up, when in truth what ever was supposed to be used would have long gone by now due to evaporation, rain, wind.
So why is it the the Government have decided to keep finding new things.
The two men would if any of this fairy tale were at all true, had hot legged it out of the place, NOT GO BLOODY SHOPPING AFTERWARD,S.
The fact that there was a fictional film on the subject, so what has the U.K, government done, they have found two men that look just like the men in the film, honestly how stupid.
The rest of the world is having a quite laugh at all this and I would suspect wondering when America is going to instruct them to drop the subject.
I would have thought that by now the U.K. would have been aware that they are refered to as Americas lap dog, the first to start barking when told by the master, because that is what all this is about,, its to show the world that despite being a spent force i.e. no longer the british empire, but by being Americas lap dog theey for some reason feel important, its a question of look at us, we are really good friend and best mates with America,and right now that in fact is not the best idea to be that closely involved with the most conflict bent nation in the world.
Remember, it is America who is the agressor 2000 bases all over the world in someone elses back yard, making themselve a target that like it or not, in the case of a nulcear war those bases have to be the first thing to hit if a country like the Federation of Russia wishes to stand a small chance of serviving, as i said , not by choice, because Russia has NOT occupied someone elses back yard, in fact they have one base outside their own country.
Its not Russia that has started all the conflict in tbe middle east, and its not the middle eastern countries that have attacked America, so lets put that to bed, its America creating ALL of the conflict, backed by its lap dog and anyone else who is ordered to do so by the U.S. or NATO which in reality is now only a mouthpiece for American propaganda, and quite incapable of acting on its own as in fact it should be doing according to the Yelta agreement where it says something about member states NOT EXPANDING ONE INCH FROM PRESENT POSITIONS, that was at the end of the last war when American boarders were the two great ocean of the world, so if Russia has NOT INCREASED ITS BOARDER and America has to the p I nt of having a base in just about every country in the world, who in honesty is the agressor, with America if anyone tried moving a single unit onto American soil, there would be all hell broke loose , but how many american troops are at the moment in Poland, Hungry, Germany.
the answer is far too many.
Great Briton needs to grow up and stop playing silly games which as they have shown thus far they are not at all good at doing, because they cannot remember what they said five minutes ago, and are not very good at getting their fact correct on the subject in hand.
Anyone who thinks im from Russia is very much out of order, I am from the U.K. but I am dead against liers and trouble makers, we have enough problems in this world without the U.K inventing fairy stories.
To finish, does nobody find it strage that the two people concerned have not been allowed to say one word even though they are both well and truly alive and well , perhaps its because they may just say something that contradicts the lie the that Gt. BRITON is perpetually telling?﻿_________________www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.orgwww.rethink911.orgwww.patriotsquestion911.comwww.actorsandartistsfor911truth.orgwww.mediafor911truth.orgwww.pilotsfor911truth.orgwww.mp911truth.orgwww.ae911truth.orgwww.rl911truth.orgwww.stj911.orgwww.v911t.orgwww.thisweek.org.ukwww.abolishwar.org.ukwww.elementary.org.ukwww.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/

The man who died after he fell from the top of a car park at Gatwick Airport has been named as a Swiss national.

Alexandre Jacob, 27, died on Thursday (March 1) after falling from the top storey of the North Terminal car park.

He was pronounced dead at the scene after police and paramedics were called at 4.01pm.

A Sussex Police spokeswoman said: "The man fell from the top of the building and was given immediate medical attention, but was sadly pronounced dead at the scene."

The circumstances surrounding how he fell are unclear.

Speaking on March 6, the police spokeswoman added: "It is believed that the man, in his 20s, was a foreign national and was en-route to a European destination. Enquiries are under way to contact his next of kin.

“An area in and around the car park was closed for a period while the incident was dealt with."

Firefighters and a team from Kent, Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance also attended the scene.

Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov reportedly kept guests awake at hotel
Witnesses say cannabis wafted from their twin room at City Stay Hotel, London
Furious guests complained after the pair smuggled a prostitute into room for sex
The Kremlin assassins who attempted to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal with the Novichok nerve agent allegedly enjoyed a drug-fuelled night with a prostitute just hours before the Salisbury attack.

Russian agents Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov – who gave an astonishing interview last week claiming to be sightseers – reportedly kept guests awake at their £75-a-night hotel.

Witnesses say cannabis wafted from their twin room in the two-star City Stay Hotel in Bow, East London, as they partied through the night.

Furious guests complained to staff after the pair smuggled a prostitute into their room for ‘noisy sex’.

Russian agents Ruslan Boshirov and Alexander Petrov – who gave an astonishing interview last week claiming to be sightseers

The Kremlin assassins who attempted to poison Sergei and Yulia Skripal with the Novichok nerve agent allegedly enjoyed a drug-fuelled night with a prostitute in this hotel

Alexander Petrov (left) and Ruslan Boshirov, the two men the UK has accused of the attempted murder of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia
Separate reports suggest that the hitmen were wheeled out for their TV interview as punishment for leaving a trail of evidence.

A Whitehall source told the Sunday Telegraph that the assassins ‘are being thrown under the bus by another agency because they’ve messed up’.

Meanwhile, it has emerged that a passport used by one of the hitmen directly links him to the Russian security services.

Travel documents used by Petrov are marked as ‘top secret’ and include a phone number for the Russian defence ministry.

The finding by the respected investigative website Bellingcat directly contradicts Russian President Vladimir Putin’s claims that Petrov and Boshirov were merely civilians who travelled to Salisbury to see its cathedral.

According to the Sun on Sunday, the hitmen argued with staff the morning after their stay at the City Stay Hotel before setting off to Salisbury on the train to carry out the Novichok attack on Skripal, 67, and his daughter, Yulia, 34.

A guest who recognised the pair from CCTV images released by police told the newspaper: ‘I could smell weed from their room. It was by the door and in the corridor, it was unmistakable. It must have been around 7pm.

‘Later there was a woman in there. I think she was a prostitute. They were having sex. Definitely. I heard them having really loud sex for a long time.

‘It was definitely a woman. I don’t think the men were having sex with each other.’

It has also emerged that Petrov and Boshirov’s passports, which were issued in 2009, provide almost no biographical data about either man before that year, such as residential addresses._________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

“Chepiga”, Boshirov 2009 and Boshirov 2018
The alleged “citizen journalist” website, Bellingcat has, of course, recently published the results of its latest piece of alleged research on the “real identity” of one of the men accused (so far without any evidence) of attempting to poison Sergey Skripal and his daughter back in March 2018.

We’ve talked about Bellingcat, and its supposed founder, Eliot Higgins, before on OffG. Bellingcat’s work has been revealed on countless occasions to be both incredibly amateurish and incredibly biased toward a certain extreme neocon/neoliberal agenda. Whether Higgins himself knows it or not, his outfit is almost certainly a front run by various intel agencies for the purpose of disseminating low-grade, and often fake or corrupted, data that the agencies and associated governments do not want to be associated with directly.

The stuff they put out is generally so bad it clearly isn’t intended to last very long under scrutiny. It’s function is to provide a compliant and unquestioning media with disposable headlines that serve to create realities in the minds of equally compliant readers and consumers of “news” for long enough to push through short-term foreign policy objectives, generally involving ramping up hostilities with designated “enemy nations.”

Bellingcat’s sloppy, absurdly partisan and almost instantly discredited claims of having identified a Russian BUK in the hands of the Donbass rebels were trumpeted in the media as “proof” of Russian culpability in the shooting down of MH17 in good time to help justify the arming of Ukraine and the sanctioning of Russia. Their even more absurd “research” claiming to prove Syria’s use of chemical weapons was likewise timed to coincide with western government agenda and blasted all over the media just long enough to create an effect in the public mind and prepare us for a wider war.

And now, unsurprisingly, Bellingcat is here again, telling us they have “proved” one of the two Russian men caught on CCTV is working for Russian military intelligence.

Now, let’s be clear. For all we know Boshirov and Petrov could be in military intelligence. They could be anything for all we know, including ex-underwear salesmen like Higgins. We have no evidence about who these men are, beyond their own, as yet unproven claims.

But the question here isn’t ‘are they in Russian military intelligence’, the question is – has Bellingcat proved they are, or even shown us any solid evidence they are?

And the answer is – no. They haven’t. Not even close.

What Bellingcat actually did is this:

They tried to find Boshirov using reverse-image searches and got nowhere
They typed “Ruslan Boshirov” into Russian online phone books and got nowhere.
(At this point they stopped looking for Boshirov directly and started looking for ANY man of approximately the right age who may have connections with the GRU. (We won’t discuss the methodological problems this raises, but do pause to consider them)).

They approached some “anonymous sources” and asked where this hypothetical GRU agent might theoretically have gone to school. These anon sources pointed them to a certain Russian military academy with the acronym “DVOKU”.
They then guessed when the hypothetical agent might have hypothetically graduated and looked for yearbook photos that might resemble Ruslan Boshirov enough to be him under a different name. And got nowhere.
(Well, to be fair they claim to have found “several possible but not certain” matches, and they did include a picture of one such, whom they admit probably isn’t Boshirov, but whose pic they include for “completeness of research process” (whatever that means)).

At this point, having Googled themselves to a standstill, they had precisely nothing to show Bosirov had ever used another. Some, atttnded military school or been linked to Russian intelligence in any way. But they did stumble on the name “Anatoliy Chepiga” who was “linked” to the search terms “Chechnya”, “DVOKU” and “hero of the Russian federation.”
With nothing much else left to go, they allegedly googled the name – and again found nothing, but they did find (using “leaked”(?) “telephone databases”) the name “Anatoliy Vladimirovitch Chepiga” listed twice (in 2003, and 2012) in two locations. One of these addresses (2003) they claim is linked to the Russian military and Spetznaz.
They then assumed these two references were to the same man and that this is the Anatoliy Chepiga named elsewhere as receiving the “hero of the Russian Federation medal.
So, at this point they have sketchy data to suggest some guy called Anatoliy Chepiga is real, about the right age and in the military (possibly Spetznaz). But absolutely nothing to show he is anything to do with Ruslan Boshirov. In fact, the likelihood that this one guy they allegedly randomly googled on an off-chance should just happen to be the real ID of Ruslan would be vanishingly remote.

It must have seemed at this point as if this narrative was going to be too thin and allusive even for Bellingcat to put out.

However right then their old friends the “anonymous sources” once again came to their rescue and – allegedly – gave them “extracts from the passport file” of Chepiga, including this photo (right), which is alleged to be of Chepiga.

Bellingcat claims this image proves Chepiga is Boshirov. It would be fair to say opinion remains divided over this conclusion.

Chepiga’s identity has been independently established by the Russian media outlet Kommersant, who did the kind of journalism beyond most western outlets and went to talk to people in Chepiga’s home town. Opinion among those who allegedly knew Chepiga seems divided about whether or not he’s Boshirov. One person says they recognised Boshirov as Chepiga immediately on seeing him on the TV. Another says Boshirov can’t be Chepiga because the latter was almost totally bald when last seen by the witness ten years ago, and his face was notably different though the eyes are similar.

We currently have no independently verified second image of Chepiga for comparison. And the Russian Government denies that any Col. Anatoliy Vladimirovich Chepiga has ever been awarded the Hero of the Russian Federation.

Let’s recap.

Bellingcat has no information linking Boshirov with Russian intelligence. He does allegedly (we haven’t sourced it) have information linking a man called Chepiga with the Russian military and Spetznaz.
The only evidence Bellingcat claims connects Chepiga with Boshirov is this anonymously provided photograph.
So, currently the entire case for Boshirov being Chepiga rests on this photo. Nothing else in the avalanche of verbiage being created around this means anything at all.

The problem is this is an unsourced photo allegedly passed to Bellingcat by an unnamed insider source as being a photo of a Russian military intelligence officer named Chepiga. This image has some resemblance to Boshirov, true, but is by no means a perfect match and may well represent two different people even as is. But it’s even worse than this. In this digital age the mere presentation of an image isn’t enough. A single image without provenance means nothing. It could be real, sure, but it could equally be manipulated, or even entirely fake.

Is this a genuine photo of Anatoliy Chepiga? Currently no one knows. Is Ruslan Boshirov actually Anatoliy Chepiga? Maybe. In the broadest sense it can’t be ruled out. But the same could be said for almost any other Russian man of the right approximate age with a roughly approximate physical appearance.

An Israeli expert on international terrorism, writer Alexander Brass, shared his view on the case of the Skripals poisoning in Salisbury. Brass draws parallels between the work of the special services of Israel and Russia – he believes that if to compare the British version with the practice of the special agents, then the absurdity becomes obvious.
“Alexander, so what, in your opinion, happened in Salisbury?”
-There was a rough provocation by the British special services. In my opinion, this is obvious.
– Why do you think so?
“There’s a lot of stupidity on stupidity.” The story with Petrov and Boshirov does not hold up any professional peer review. According to the Brits, the Skripals were poisoned by GRU agents (this is what the department is called, although this is now the Main Directorate of the RF General Staff).
I want to explain how the special services work. If you need someone to eliminate, then this is a very serious operation, which is being prepared for a long time. A very significant material and human resource is allocated. We are talking about dozens of employees. On the territory of this state, an “advanced command post” is being created.
In the operation, a technical support group, a logistic group, a cover group, an external surveillance group and a group of performers are involved.
The performers themselves appear at the very last moment. They do not go anywhere, lighting up on cameras, do not use public transport, but move on rented cars, which they do not rent themselves. And the more they will not stop in hotels, but will live on safe houses provided by the logistics group.
Such groups do not come under the passport of their country, do not go to the embassy for obtaining a visa, leaving fingerprints. This is complete nonsense. Professionals do not work that way.
If the GRU acted, both the killers and the other participants in the operation would come to the UK on the passports of other countries that have visa-free relations with it. Here, two alleged GRU officers go to the embassy, ​​leave their fingerprints there, get a visa, stop at the hotel, pass under all the cells. This you will not find even in ladies’ detective novels.
– Maybe it is unprofessionalism associated with the degradation and decay, which after the collapse of the Soviet Union took place in all structures and institutions of society, including in the special services? Lost skills, methods, no one to teach young people. There is such an opinion.
– This is an opinion at the level of kitchen conversations. Where did the armed forces and the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation manage to raise such a “bardak” to such a level as they could organize the World Cup and the Olympics at such a high level? The GRU has always been and remains one of the most professional and most intelligent intelligence agencies in the world.
If the GRU decided to eliminate Skripal, then I have a question: why was the “Novichok” used? This is not a remedy, it’s a chemical weapon of mass destruction. It’s like dropping an atomic bomb on a city to kill one criminal. When special services eliminate an object, they always try to do it so that no autopsy shows that he was poisoned.
– Can you give examples?
– I can give many examples. In 1978, the well-known international terrorist Vadia Haddad, one of the founders of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), was killed. “Mossad” did not take responsibility for this, but sewed in a bag you can not hide. A potent biological poison was mixed with chocolate. Within three months he died of a painful and incomprehensible illness in the GDR clinic. His autopsy was conducted at the University of East Berlin. No trace of poison was found. The doctors assumed that he died of leukemia.
– How did you know that he was killed by Mossad?
– Information about this began to leak a few years ago. It came from Algeria. One of the former Mossad agents during another trial gave evidence that he witnessed how this happened, calling the specific names of the performers. This man also confirmed that he was a participant in this operation. This information was also confirmed by other, non-overlapping sources.
– Were there any cases when the Mossad operation ended unsuccessfully and the enemies of Israel were still alive?
– Take the last unsuccessful attempt of the Israelis to kill Khaled Mashaal, one of the leaders of the terrorist organization Hamas. He would have been killd if he had not been given an antidote at the last minute.
Everything happened on September 25, 1997 on one of the streets of Amman – the capital of Jordan. Just some passer-by, who was next to Mashaal, “accidentally” stumbled and splashed the liquid from the can of Coke to his neck. The next day Mashal would have died of a heart attack, and no traces. But the performers were seized on the spot. After that, the King of Jordan Hussein demanded that Israel provide an antidote, and in return promised to release Israeli agents.
– That is, substances that leave no traces are not detected by expertise and imitate death from the disease, the secret services have long been known?
– That’s it. Could the GRU not have been able to use some other poison, and not the “Novichok”, which leaves traces everywhere? If such technologies were in the special services already in the 1950s, do not the GRU have them today?
Let’s talk about the cameras. The UK on this some kind of fad. In no country in the world there is such a number of surveillance cameras per capita.
If I’m not mistaken, about one camera for 15 people. Literally every meter is looked through. MI5, the British counterintelligence service, is considered one of the best in the world. And if Britain took care of Skripal, he was very well guarded. At least his house was hung with all the cameras, which are only possible.
If, according to MI5, these agents visited Salisbury, they came to the house of Skripal and coated the door handle with this substance – so show the records from the cameras! How can it be that it was at this point that the cameras suddenly turned off?
“But maybe these agents found the cameras and turned them off?”
“If you say that the GRU has deteriorated so badly that it has lit up everywhere and left its mark, why did this degraded intelligence agency manage to turn off the surveillance cameras near the Skripal house at the right time?” Where is the logic?
– When our agents killed the Chechen terrorist Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev in Qatar, they got caught and were captured by the local police. True, they carried out the task …
“And how many Israeli agents were arrested?” This does not mean degradation. I do not know what happened after the collapse of the USSR in the GRU, but I know what happened in the Foreign Intelligence Service, since I had been friends with one of the very high-ranking officers of this service for many years in retirement. We had very close, friendly relations with him for many years. Unfortunately, he died a few years ago.
He told me that the degradation of the special services is only an appearance. He retired, because he already had years of service and he did not agree with the mess that was going on in the country. But there was no mess in the secret services! Who wanted to – left. But was there a leak of information? Have they discovered an agent network? Agents of Soviet special services worked all over the world. Have any of them suffered? No one. The mess can be anywhere, but not in the special services.
– Let’s admit. All this really looks strange – first let out Skripal, then kill him. Would not it be easier to just leave him in jail?
– Now about the personality of Sergei Skripal himself. The main version, which is voiced by the British side, is revenge. But in special services there is no such thing as revenge. Neither the Israelis, nor the Russians. Only the Cubans had it. We must understand that the special services are a very practical organization. Why revenge? A person is eliminated only when he can cause real harm. The Skripal has already done harm. He could not do more harm.
– For example, as a lesson to other potential traitors, no?
– No. I once asked my acquaintances who worked in your special services (I have never had any contact with active staff, only with retirees): “Why did not Kalugin be killed?” And they answered me with a counter question: “Why haven’t you eliminated the defector? “I said: he has already done harm. To eliminate him, it is necessary to develop a very serious operation, to send people, people should risk their lives. For the sake of what – for the sake of revenge? They say: “For the same reason, we do not touch Kalugin and do not touch anyone.” Israelis are not even exterminated by former terrorists. At the moment when the terrorist stops terrorist activities, regardless of what he did before, he is left alone. The only ones who were persecuted to the end were Nazi criminals.
– There is an opinion that he was eliminated because he taught at the counterintelligence school and taught young employees how to deal with the GRU.
– And what, in MI5, except for Skripal, no one knows how to do it? I think they know it better than him.
– In such cases, there is a very simple practice. When Skripal was taken on treason, he probably was intelligibly explained: either you go to life imprisonment and you will be in solitary confinement somewhere beyond the Arctic Circle, or you will receive 12 years of strict regime in the European part of Russia. But for this, you must fully tell what you have handed over, and give evidence. To cooperate with the investigation.
Similarly, when the former colonel of the Defense Intelligence of Israel’s Defense Intelligence Department, I did not name him, went into business and got into debt.
He went to Lebanon to buy heroin and conduct a drug deal, and was captured by Hezbollah. He told everything he knew, inflicting enormous damage to Israel’s defense capability. Because he was an officer on this site, he worked for Lebanon.
The Israelis exchanged him, they pulled him out. He was told: let’s make a deal. You will not be prosecuted. But you must thoroughly, in every detail, tell what you told them. We need to know what they know. The same was with Skripal. And there was simply no need to eliminate him.
– So there was no motive for Russian special services?
– There was no motive. Then, imagine: they used “Novichok”, they carried it with them in a bottle from under the perfume. In the practice of special services this does not exist. Performers go light, with other people’s passports. They receive weapons on the spot. And when such a group of liquidators works, it works autonomously, without affecting the local residency. In case of failure, do not harm the residence. When the surveillance is working and the capture team is working, they do not know each other in person, they communicate only through certain communication channels.
– The question is also why the poison did not act instantly, and Skripal was still wandering about for a few hours.
– It’s a different matter. The British are so disrespectful to Russia that even provocation can not be done at a decent level. It’s even humiliating. Therefore, Russia does not comment on this in any way. And why is it necessary to comment on some kind of nonsense?
It took half a year to Brits to find the “suspects.” Although they left their full personal data and fingerprints in the embassy when they received visas. This is a separate nonsense. Then Russia said: please! Here they are, here’s their interview. If they were active GRU officers, they would not have left their fingerprints in the embassy for anything.
“Who are they?”
– I do not know who they are, but certainly not employees of special services. If the GRU needed to kill Skripal, he would now be dead. This would have been done quietly and without scandal.
“Why Britain needs this?”
– This is a well-thought-out strategy of demonization and international isolation of Russia. In the UK, as in the rest of the Western world, everything works very simply. Most people do not read newspapers at all. And those who read, do not understand half. But everyone sees the headlines. Provocation with the Skripals is needed to exclude the Russian Federation from the Commission for Investigating the Use of Chemical Weapons in Syria. This is a minimum program.

Tags: EU; Russia; Skripal case; UK_________________--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.comhttp://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou can attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum